Hey just thought I would get your guys opinions on this. This article was a bit of an eye opener for me. I had know from reading the blogs that even the soldiers that we are fighting the war the wrong way. That we needed a change in tactics not troop numbers. But I hadnt thought of it this way. My mental image this article made me think of was of what would happened in the 60 and 70 if the national guard had tried to take out the mob..... They would have all hidden has respectable buisness men and as soon as there back was black mailing, kidnapping thire familys of or just killing politicians... What is all of your opinions?
One thing I never truly got; especialy in afganistan; why the hell do you being state of the art artilery to shell the countryside? What causes those gangs to form in the first place? Hate for a certain group; operations like this should never last a year, nevermind sevral; because of the prolonged stay, more people are rallied against those same troops...
Well regardless how we got there what is pointed out is that we are fighting against a structure we HAVE fought before dispite what polititions are saying. We took down organised crime before but it was through not brute force like they are trying to now. The gangs during the 1930s by taking away there main source of income(bootlegged alcohol) and the mafia during the 60-70s but infiltration. Even now trying to take out a gang is next to impossible through force. So quick way to fix Iraq, take out the troops and sent in the LAPD lol. Theyll feel right at home.:p
Include into this mess the fact that third generation mercenary gangs have an additional source of external income; namely, supportive governments from outside the region. We all know that Iran, Saudi Arabia, and other adjacent countries have reason to profit from instability in Iraq especially if THEIR gang wins. As long as this cash keeps flowing, it'll be tough to stop these gangs through economic means. And as long as the US intelligence agencies keep firing arabic speakers and favoring whitey, we're certainly not going to win via infiltration.
... America never took down organised crime. I mean, the total of Europe has maybe 1500 gun deaths a year, America has that tenfold... And I say Europe, it's roughly as large as the U.S. And gun deaths is just one of the examples!
We just took down all the Italians that we stereotyped into movies and TV shows like the Godfather and the Sopranos.
Here's some food for thought: more arabic translators fired. I have no opinion about sexuality, or rather, I don't feel qualified in discussing it and could probably see both sides of an argument. But that doesn't change the fact that we're firing valuable intel gathering agents and officers in a time where the CIA is a joke. All this stuff on top of our intelligence community's already stereotyped and possibly bigoted opinion of our own intelligence officers that are muslim.
I wouldn't go so far as to say every day, every where. But this is an example of how such policies can go wrong.
what's so bad about homosexuals anyway? and sorry, "their bad because this book says so" won't be good enough.
meh people mostly say it isnt natural well for those people that think this: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=6421 http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/03/08/inside_the_mind/ http://www.scienceblog.com/cms/node/2421 and theres more...
there are all sorts of gay animals. Remember that penguin craze in the US awhile back? After the movie with Morgon Freeman as narrator? Well, the ultra conservatives in the US (I don't know what they're called in the UK or elsewhere) got all excited about how this was an example of the natural order of things. Suprise! Gay penguins!
Well, I mean, when you declare that argument invalid... There's not a lot left, really. Also, Caelo, while I appreciate your enthusiasm, I really think that it's only polite to wait until someone actually voices opposition before you shoot them down. :p
